Re: [9front] proof and page

[Stanley Lieber <sl@stanleylieber.com>]

On December 5, 2020 7:19:52 PM EST, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
>Quoth Stuart Morrow <morrow.stuart@gmail.com>:
>> Probably the reason for the semicolon was it's actually a sentence
>> that way. So I followed that line of thought with my '--'.
>> 
>> Anyway, I was in proof (quite a few days ago now, sorry for delay)
>> making it consistent with what I did to page (don't know why I didn't
>> think to do that earlier, when the whole point of the page patch was
>> consistency) and now I think we should just delete proof, at least
>> provided nobody claims to use it. The whole thing is bugs. Easy to
>> fix, but still. It doesn't do anything that page doesn't do better.
>> 
>> Here's what would need to change:
>> 
>> man (delete -p or alias it to -P)
>> man(1)
>> troff(1)
>> rio(1), which inexplicably references proof(1).
>> 
>> Executables stick around after the source is gone (I still have
>> ape/mv|cp), so I would want the deletion of cmd/proof to be on a
>> time-delay, so that that one last bug fix ('illegal;') can mk install
>> for everyone.
>> 
>> Stuart
>> 
>
>I'm ok with this, as long as nobody else objects.

i don't use proof at all.

sl